Whats keeping you from getting a new Mac Pro? [Archive]

illegalprelude

Mar 8, 2009, 02:29 PM

I have to say, this update made it very tempting to get a new Mac Pro (ive been wanting to replace my G5 for sometime now) and its a heck of a lot cheaper too IMHO, the same config as last time, came around $1000 cheaper for me this time :D

Having said that, I cant help but wait. First, Im assuming that once Snow Leopard get shipped, that a Mac Pro will follow and I just think Snow Leopard installed on the system from the beginning will somehow be better suited and more optimized then me installing it myself. That maybe by launch, the next version of the Xenon processor will be out.

2nd beef is and maybe Snow Leopard will also fix this problem is Blu-ray. I just cannot understand for the love of god, why Apple does not support Blu-ray when we sat on the Blu-ray board. Either give just software support and let people get their own external drive or internal, or offer the option for just a lot of money. Its not like were not used to them jacking up the price to the moon for ram and hard drive space. So why not just offer it as an option for those who want it, im not asking for it be standard. I dunno, it just really ticks me off when I see an $800 Acer come with a blu-ray player but to not even have the option for my $5000 Mac Pro.

/end rant\ lol

So, whats your reason for not getting a Mac Pro just yet?

amoergosum

Mar 8, 2009, 02:43 PM

I just think Snow Leopard installed on the system from the beginning will somehow be better suited and more optimized then me installing it myself.

???

NEiMac

Mar 8, 2009, 02:43 PM

Money!:rolleyes:

Tallest Skil

Mar 8, 2009, 02:45 PM

???

Exactly, what? :confused:

If you think that there will be "residue", do an Erase and Install.

Hrududu

Mar 8, 2009, 02:49 PM

Money!:rolleyes:
I would bet that is whats keeping about 98% of people from picking one up today.

m1stake

Mar 8, 2009, 02:54 PM

I just think Snow Leopard installed on the system from the beginning will somehow be better suited and more optimized then me installing it myself. That maybe by launch, the next version of the Xenon processor will be out.

So, whats your reason for not getting a Mac Pro just yet?

The 5500 series isn't even officially out yet, I wouldn't bet on the 5600 series coming out before January 2010. :rolleyes: You're probably better off installing it yourself and getting rid of the printer drivers and language packs. "Optimized" doesn't mean anything.

Personal reason for not buying the new Mac Pro? I'd have to go with the laughable combination of much higher price for similar performance... unless you move up to the 2.66 dual quad option or above. That hardly makes sense.

miK.

Mar 8, 2009, 03:04 PM

It's not the money, I can afford it. It's the VALUE.
Folks are saying it's overpriced. It's NOT overpriced for what it is, but
it is overkill for my needs. I do not want a glossiMac or Mini.

It's interesting that more people than ever are talking Hackintosh now.
I am thinking exactly the same thing.

cmaier

Mar 8, 2009, 03:35 PM

jjahshik32

Mar 8, 2009, 03:41 PM

Money!:rolleyes:

+++ monies

miK.

Mar 8, 2009, 03:41 PM

1) "It's the VALUE."
2) "It's NOT overpriced for what it is."

Clear as mud.

Let me clarify for you then... to ME the cost is too much to pay for what I need.

mik34

Mar 8, 2009, 03:47 PM

Don't need one for what I do on the computer. Sounds nice though.

fabriciom

Mar 8, 2009, 03:49 PM

The problem with apple right now is that their stock is not plummeting like the rest of the stock market. If that happens then they will be pressured to lower prices. Until then. Keep wishing...

cmaier

Mar 8, 2009, 03:52 PM

The problem with apple right now is that their stock is not plummeting like the rest of the stock market. If that happens then they will be pressured to lower prices. Until then. Keep wishing...

No they won't. They make high end computers and make more profit per computer. That's their business model. Complaining that they cost too much is like complaining because Porsche won't make a $12,000 commuter car.

Pressure

Mar 8, 2009, 04:06 PM

I would have to say my current Mac Pro (early 2008) :)

Which I may upgrade with the new Radeon HD 4870.

fabriciom

Mar 8, 2009, 04:12 PM

No they won't. They make high end computers and make more profit per computer. That's their business model. Complaining that they cost too much is like complaining because Porsche won't make a $12,000 commuter car.

They make their money with the ipod, iphone, mac books and imacs. Thats why they can "afford" to price the mac pros a what ever they like. Also most people who purchase mac pros do it for business not pleasure. If their over all sales drop 40-50% like the rest of the industry they will drop prices. Apple is a sales company not services. So if their are not making money selling jack where is the income gonna come from? Steve Jobs doing presentations around the world?

cmaier

Mar 8, 2009, 04:19 PM

They make their money with the ipod, iphone, mac books and imacs. Thats why they can "afford" to price the mac pros a what ever they like. Also most people who purchase mac pros do it for business not pleasure. If their over all sales drop 40-50% like the rest of the industry they will drop prices. Apple is a sales company not services. So if their are not making money selling jack where is the income gonna come from? Steve Jobs doing presentations around the world?

No they won't drop prices. All of the other things you mention (ipod, iphone, mac books, imacs) are also premium-priced products - you can get equivalent (albeit far less elegant) functionality far cheaper.

They are a sales company which is exactly why they won't lower prices. They may market new products to other niches (home servers, etc.), but they won't fundamentally alter the price structure of their existing products. To do so would be like BMW charging Chevy prices. It might increase sales in the short term, but would destroy their brand and necessitate making lower quality products. Won't happen. You heard it here first.

bozz2006

Mar 8, 2009, 04:25 PM

my old mac pro.

fabriciom

Mar 8, 2009, 04:40 PM

No they won't drop prices. All of the other things you mention (ipod, iphone, mac books, imacs) are also premium-priced products - you can get equivalent (albeit far less elegant) functionality far cheaper.

They are a sales company which is exactly why they won't lower prices. They may market new products to other niches (home servers, etc.), but they won't fundamentally alter the price structure of their existing products. To do so would be like BMW charging Chevy prices. It might increase sales in the short term, but would destroy their brand and necessitate making lower quality products. Won't happen. You heard it here first.

All car companies have lowered their prices, GM will be going out of business soon, Toyota (which is the worlds biggest automaker) asked the government for help. What are you expecting the US government to jump in a nationalize apple? If you think a drop on sales/stock will not force them to lower prices you are just plain ignorant. All public companies respond to what ever their stockholders demand.

cmaier

Mar 8, 2009, 04:46 PM

All car companies have lowered their prices, GM will be going out of business soon, Toyota (which is the worlds biggest automaker) asked the government for help. What are you expecting the US government to jump in a nationalize apple? If you think a drop on sales/stock will not force them to lower prices you are just plain ignorant. All public companies respond to what ever their stockholders demand.

A drop in sales isn't important. Profit is. And not all car companies have lowered prices. And the ones that have have not done so in a way that fundamentally alters price structures. You don't get a Mercedes for the price of a Honda. You get a Honda for a few percent less dough.

Apples still sell really well, and Apple makes more money per machine than nearly everyone else. They're doing fine, and while prices may drop $50 here and $100 there, they are not going to magically start charging commodity PC prices for their stuff, no matter how much people on hear whine. To do so would actually be suicide, and Steve Jobs knows this better than anyone.

m1stake

Mar 8, 2009, 04:52 PM

No one is asking for the Mac Pro to be a $1000 machine, lomyale.

Striderdm1

Mar 8, 2009, 04:53 PM

Money!:rolleyes:

Bingo !
same here...of course :(

Weepul

Mar 8, 2009, 04:58 PM

So, whats your reason for not getting a Mac Pro just yet?

Performance per dollar. Unless independent benchmarks come up with a very pleasant surprise, I can do better with a used 8x2.8, although it wouldn't be as fast in absolute terms.

grue

Mar 8, 2009, 05:02 PM

So, whats your reason for not getting a Mac Pro just yet?

The cost/benefit of upgrading from my 8x3.0 would be appalling.

designed

Mar 8, 2009, 05:09 PM

I'm waiting for the first benchmarks to arrive. The 2.66GHz octo is a bit pricey for my liking, and I have my doubts about the 2.26GHz octo vs. 2.66GHz quad. Along with the benchmarks I'm waiting for a few in-depth reviews discussing i.e. upgrading the processors on the 2.26GHz octo.

But this is the update I was waiting for, so it's either now or much later again.

Igantius

Mar 8, 2009, 06:01 PM

Similar to designed, I'm waiting for some real-world benchmarks.

evildede

Mar 8, 2009, 06:34 PM

I am not getting the new one as the base 8 core config is just too expensive and not worth it, and the quad core config has the same price as the 8 core hapertown base config and there is no way that it is as fast, no matter what apple says. The only way I'd get one would be for the 8 core 2.66 or 2.93, but they are definitely overpriced... so until then, I am staying with my hapertown 8 core 3.2

bearcatrp

Mar 8, 2009, 06:43 PM

I never believed in hyperthreading. I'll wait for the true 8 core chip when I upgrade. Happy with my 2.8 octo.

Jouhne

Mar 8, 2009, 06:44 PM

Well I'm waiting also for more specs information concerning the 3500 series (aka Quad 2,93) to replacing my Mac Pro Quad 2,66 (first gen).
The 8 GB of ram max is not a problem for me. I'm working on DTP with Indesign CS4 (2 or 3 docs open. 96 pages A4 with a lot of pictures, well a magazine), Photoshop CS4, Acrobat 9, Mail, Safari, iTunes, Pages, Aperture, Font Explorer Pro, Things, Evernote, iCal, etc. and... sometimes WoW without problems at all. All those Apps open without paging to disk.
So again for me 8 GB are not the problem.
What I would like to know for the 3500 series is :
Turbo Boost is On. I can use some power on poor threaded software like Adobe.
QPI is 6,4 GT/s. Faster Access to RAM.
Real world differences (on a Mac) between 2 and 3 RAM channels.
The noise of the 4870 Ati card :)

m1stake

Mar 8, 2009, 06:48 PM

Depending on who makes the card it could be loud our quiet. ATI's own boards run fairly hot, but are quiet. Most of the third party vendors have quieter boards with bigger fans and cooler running cards.

miniConvert

Mar 8, 2009, 06:49 PM

Well, needing to clear out my home office and find something to do with all the old, crappy hardware in there is a pretty big obstacle. Plus it'd be nice to buy a Mac Pro with Snow Leopard on it rather than having to upgrade... maybe the processors will be faster/cheaper by then, too.

I can see me getting one, but I'm not in any hurry. For anyone who 'needs' a new Mac Pro, and has been waiting for it, I really can't see any reason to wait even longer...

Dreamail

Mar 8, 2009, 06:55 PM

Also most people who purchase mac pros do it for business not pleasure.
I keep hearing these 'Mac Pros are for business' arguments. And in my case that is rather BS.
The problem is that this update has rather useless configurations for many businesses.
It misses the target audience!

I was ready to buy a high-end Mac Pro, waiting for the upgrade. Since I do 3D work more render threads are always better so Nehalem CPUs are a good choice.

Then Apple introduces new machines with an anemic Nvidia GPU and pretty laughable max RAM.

For 3D work you want at least 1GB VRAM, 1.5GB is better. Anything less is rather hindering. And with a machine that costs $8,000+ you don't want to start out with a bad compromise.

And for 16 threads a max RAM of 32GB never gets you more than 2GB per thread. That's not a lot either.

So that's my problem. I'm hearing all these 'Mac Pros are for business' arguments to justify the current release. Sure, the price is high yet still for a business that's OK. But the new configurations are useless!
The previous generation of Mac Pros was a lot more suitable to my business than this 'update'. At least they had a high-end Nvidia Quadro option. And the thread/RAM ratio was better.

Now one could argue, get a Mac Pro now and a new graphics card later.
But in the past Apple has not sold the Quadro card on its own, it was only available with a Mac Pro. If Apple pulls the same thing again then I'm stuffed.
If they were forthcoming and telling its customers that they will release a new Pro Quadro option once Snow Leopard ships and that this card will be available separately, then I might be tempted.
But Apple never gives its business customers any information. Which is just killing their business (at least in my case).

Until then for my business the new Mac Pro is a massive step backwards and I'm very disappointed.
Now I'm struggling between getting the previous high-end model vs. getting an HP - which means bye-bye Apple for good...

kabelabs

Mar 8, 2009, 07:00 PM

the only two things that are keeping me from getting the new one are:

1. i have a 2008 mac pro with dual 2.8 quads, 12gb, 3.25tb hd, a 3870 and a 2600. i'm happy with it and it is plenty fast.

2. i'll wait until the 6 core chips are added, or better. skip a generation. i don't need a 1-20% speed increase in what i do because i'm not really in a hurry and a couple of seconds to a couple of minutes really isn't that big of a deal.

i used to be a big time pc gamer that upgraded every little thing when there was something new, and now in my prime i know what i have is plenty fast and handles all my needs.

although, the gamer in me wouldn't mind a 4870 or two.

hugodrax

Mar 8, 2009, 07:41 PM

My First Gen MacPro is more than enough so far. So I cannot justify getting one since I will not notice a performance increase since I do not even tax the 2006 model.

Plus 4500 bucks for a dual 2.66Ghz seems like a steep price increase. I though we were undergoing an economic deflationary period.

iBunny

Mar 8, 2009, 07:52 PM

Q: Whats keeping you from geting a new Mac Pro?

A: The horrible selection of Video Cards I am forced to choose from :(

Macpropro80

Mar 8, 2009, 07:53 PM

my wallet :)

bozz2006

Mar 8, 2009, 07:56 PM

my wife
http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/funny-pictures-lol-squid.jpg

SnakeOiler

Mar 8, 2009, 08:00 PM

Nothing. I've been running a Dell quad Q6600 for over a year now. I owe Apple a few bucks. Should be here next week.

sedril

Mar 8, 2009, 08:12 PM

The main reason I'm holding off is because a few weeks ago I could spec out the top of the line mac pro 3.2 octo for around $5000, whereas today the top of the line 2.93 octo is around $6400..... That's a huge increase. I'll wait for now and see what happens down the road...

I'd say I'm waiting for a good GPU to be put in a mac, but apparently that's never going to happen...

bearcatrp

Mar 8, 2009, 08:16 PM

My First Gen MacPro is more than enough so far. So I cannot justify getting one since I will not notice a performance increase since I do not even tax the 2006 model.

Nice thing about the 1st gen mac pro's is you can upgrade from a quad to an octo pretty reasonable from ebay. Not hard to do. Getting ready to do my 2ghz quad to a 2.33 octo. Others here have already done it. From what I have read, a 1st gen upgraded to 3ghz octo comes close to the 2008 2.8 octo. But those are still to pricey for me now. The lower ones are cheaper.

bearcatrp

Mar 8, 2009, 08:18 PM

my wife
http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/funny-pictures-lol-squid.jpg

I'll bet she hasn't seen this picture or your new toy would be fried. haha :D

bozz2006

Mar 8, 2009, 08:22 PM

I've never seen this starfish before in my life!

marbles

Mar 8, 2009, 08:44 PM

Doc69

Mar 8, 2009, 08:56 PM

I'm also waiting for the real world benchmarks before taking the plunge. I'm wondering if the nearly 20% increase in price, of the basic 2.26 octo model over the old 2.8 octo, can be justified.

With the 2nd generation Mac Pros, price went from $2499 to $2799 but they gave us a slightly higher clock speeds, faster bus, faster memory and eight cores instead of four. That was a great deal. But this time, the price has increased 20% and the clock speed is down 20%. I know that the Nehalem architecture has many great advantages and that it's like comparing apples to oranges, I'm just skeptical that it can be that much faster.

I would be very disappointed if we only see a noticeable speed increase in multi-core tasks, like video encoding, as I'm skeptical that the 2.26 can be considerable faster than the old 2.8 in single threaded apps. $3000 should be able to buy you a killer Mac Pro that is considerably faster than last years model. I guess we'll find out next week. I'll keep my fingers crossed.

motox25

Mar 8, 2009, 09:04 PM

Only thing keeping me from getting one is snow leopard. I'm ready to upgrade into an intel processor so I can run windows. I need it for some apps that aren't on mac. IF they run as good as the reviews are saying, its worth the money to me. Guess we'll find out when more people start getting them.

Bubba Satori

Mar 8, 2009, 09:59 PM

thedarkhorse

Mar 8, 2009, 10:28 PM

Value or lack there of, is what is keeping me.
I really wanted to move up to the mac pro this year, don't have the funds yet, but am working on it. I don't see any way I could go with the crippled quad core, costs $300 more than 2008 quad core and lost a lot of expandability(second cpu slot and 8gb ram limit).
The new octo core would end up costing me probably $1000CAD more than I was expecting with 2008's prices, and with video editing/rendering the new architecture is not a huge performance boost, especially not large enough to warrant the inflated price.

I will get a mac pro if I can find a decently priced 2008 model when I have the funds or apple restructures the pricing/tiers to match last years machines.

Video card options don't really phase me, I would be getting the 4870 either way which I think is more than enough for my needs(if I want a gaming machine I'd build one for half the price, not that I wouldn't game with the mac pro a bit ;) ).

bozz2006

Mar 8, 2009, 10:39 PM

voyagerd

Mar 8, 2009, 10:45 PM

I need to save up the money to buy one.

illegalprelude

Mar 8, 2009, 10:54 PM

a new Gateway

Epic Fail. Some of the biggest POS computers out there. Beyond the fact that its a windows unit, Gateway uses the bottom of the barrel parts. Plus, there is a lot more to a Mac Pro then just spec for spec, aka expandability but thats another topic that will just go round and round :)

turtlebud

Mar 8, 2009, 11:21 PM

for the type of mac pro I'd want (not the single quad core), I can't afford it/it's outside of my budget. I will be getting a octo-2.8Ghz previous gen

Bubba Satori

Mar 8, 2009, 11:31 PM

Epic Fail. Some of the biggest POS computers out there. Beyond the fact that its a windows unit, Gateway uses the bottom of the barrel parts. Plus, there is a lot more to a Mac Pro then just spec for spec, aka expandability but thats another topic that will just go round and round :)

Not according to my store's return rate. Epic fail on your part regarding the reliability and return rates of todays computers.

Vista SP1 works fine, just as good as XP did after it's second SP. What bottom of the barrel parts ? You need to toss that tired old urban legend away. The Gateways of 5 or 6 years ago were terrible, but the new ones of the last couple of years are good machines. I know what the return rates are. You, on the other hand, are blowing smoke. The Gateway my customer bought had a better CPU, video card and HD than the MacPro. The tower I sold the customer had plenty of expandability for his needs. At $800.

Btw, MacBook Pros and iMacs have some of the highest return rates. Defective video cards and lcds. Only Acers are worse. Epic fail, indeed.

Bubba Satori

Mar 8, 2009, 11:37 PM

Mac gets a lot of "switchers", but if the proposed switch is into a mac pro, that's gonna be a hard sell.

Yep. Half of my iMac sales are to switchers. Most of them didn't even know what an iMac was.

motox25

Mar 8, 2009, 11:40 PM

ncc1701d

Mar 8, 2009, 11:52 PM

No one seems to know about the ram. Can't buy just 2 x 4GB on the apple web site, so don't know even if it can run on 2 x 4GB ram (from 3rd party) or any combinations.

Also would be running an eizo 21" , until acd 30" LCD comes out. If I get an answer on the ram, I'll buy same day.

chedda

Mar 9, 2009, 05:29 AM

Apart from the obvious hesitation because of the cost other alarm bells are ringing for me. This machine is already touted as early 2009 which by itself means there will be a late 2009 model ? Also the dreaded revision A syndrome which we see all too often from hardware. To me the new mac pro looks a little unfinished particularly the ram slots and the lack of a quadro card. Can this really be the machine that they launch snow leopard with ? From my understanding something is missing i believe. If open cl is to be maximised then surely we need a more powerfull card or does it help with multiple cards ? I have the funds and one kidney left. So now it's a case of studying the bench marks which must be imminent and then finally waiting for the snow leopard release to bite the bullet.Some things remain constant with apple particulary revision A products, price falls, and with hindsight even forum reactions to new products are becoming very predictable.

BLESSED BE THE EARLY ADOPTER

Weepul

Mar 9, 2009, 05:38 AM

This machine is already touted as early 2009 which by itself means there will be a late 2009 model?

That's not an indicator. Last year's was Early 2008 and there was no other 2008 Mac Pro.

Tallest Skil

Mar 9, 2009, 05:42 AM

Also the dreaded revision A syndrome which we see all too often from hardware.

Heard a lot about it; never had it happen. It's a myth.

From my understanding something is missing i believe.

What, then?

Some things remain constant with apple particulary revision A products, price falls, and with hindsight even forum reactions to new products are becoming very predictable.

Except that Apple never lowers the price of a product during its lifetime.

grue

Mar 9, 2009, 05:55 AM

Except that Apple never lowers the price of a product during its lifetime.

You haven't been a Mac user very long, have you?

Tallest Skil

Mar 9, 2009, 05:57 AM

You haven't been a Mac user very long, have you?

Nineteen years. They don't drop prices.

Setmose

Mar 9, 2009, 05:58 AM

I really want the new Mac Pro, and I have set aside the cash for it.

But I think I will wait until there is a version of it bundled with Snow Leopard.

I prefer to get a machine that is already configured/tuned for the new OS.

For example, my understanding is that ATI/AMD is rewriting their drivers for Snow Leopard in order to take advantage of Grand Central and to enable OpenCL. It's a serious enough commitment that that is where their Apple-specific resources are going instead of additional cards for Leopard. So *maybe* there will be more video card choices under Snow Leopard, and I'm hoping 4870 X2 or whatever else is "hot" in June.

Also, I wanted to wait to see some specific benchmarks. But in a few weeks, waiting to June becomes not such a big deal.

Of course, I'm assuming that June will be the Snow Leopard release. :apple:

grue

Mar 9, 2009, 06:13 AM

Nineteen years. They don't drop prices.

Ok, whatever helps you sleep at night. It's not a common occurrence (especially of late), but it's not unheard of.

So in your alleged nineteen years of Mac usage, how many of them came after puberty, and buying the machines on your own?

Macpropro80

Mar 9, 2009, 06:14 AM

grue

Mar 9, 2009, 06:19 AM

For what it's worth, I don't expect to see a Mac Pro price drop any time soon, I just have this deeply ingrained hatred of false blanket statements.

edit: Above hatred also applies to glossy screens, USB being used for anything except input devices, and the new small keyboards.

mongorama

Mar 9, 2009, 06:27 AM

I'm waiting for benchmarks, preferably some that will give me both OSX marks as well as XP/Vista benchmarks (blasting away at badguys in a Windows Boot Camp partition helps mellow me out after a long day :)).

I want to decide on 4 cores or 8 cores, but have no idea which way to go until benchmarks start rolling out... I also want to wait for a bit until the memory of my last big purchase fades from the lady's mind (had to replace my MBP a few weeks ago). She doesn't like it when I drop oodles of cash on computers instead of on her. :p

synth3tik

Mar 9, 2009, 06:35 AM

For me it is simply that the specs have not changed all the much from my current Mac Pro (06 model). I can see reason to upgrade, but for the price it is not worth it yet. Maybe in a year or two. This girl still has a lot of life left in her.

Tallest Skil

Mar 9, 2009, 06:37 AM

Ok, whatever helps you sleep at night. It's not a common occurrence (especially of late), but it's not unheard of.

Examples, please, of it happening at all.:confused:

grue

Mar 9, 2009, 06:40 AM

Examples, please, of it happening at all.:confused:

iPhone is the most recent example, but of course isn't a computer.

My PowerBook 3400c/240 and Power Mac 6500/300 both had price drops right around the time I bought them. I can't recall which was which, but one dropped right before I bought, and the other dropped right after.

8600 had a drop, as did the 9600 at the same time if memory serves.

I believe there was a drop in the Yikes/Sawtooth era as well, but that might be ****** del toro

jessica.

Mar 9, 2009, 06:42 AM

I'm not convinced the new chips are really going to be worth the upgrade for me. Every user is different though and some will buy and never even use 80% of the power it can handle.

Tallest Skil

Mar 9, 2009, 06:43 AM

Macpropro80

Mar 9, 2009, 06:44 AM

Vista SP1 works fine

Is that so? I did IT for my yacht club and they just bought a new HP desktop with vista. IT BLUE SCREENED TWICE OUT OF THE BOX WHILE INSTALL HP PRINTER DRIVERS! If thats working fine, I can't imagine how bad broken is!

grue

Mar 9, 2009, 06:46 AM

So none since '96, then. Thought so.:p

I think it's safe to say that Apple doesn't do price drops, since the Scully/Amelio era was its own tyrant.

There are also minor ones from time to time, but they generally predated the current situation where douchebags buy anything with an Apple logo to make themselves feel cool. See also: Pre 3rd-gen iPod.

But yeah, I'm not saying Apple makes a habit of it, but to say that they never do it is the kind of blanket statement that drives me to rage-induced madness. Everyone between the age of birth and about 17 can evoke the same reaction.

nethfel

Mar 9, 2009, 06:48 AM

What's keeping me from getting a new mac pro:

1) My Mac Pro is still new to me
2) Money. To get a comperable, relative time wise future proof version to be comparable to what I have (8 core, 8gig of ram, wifi, 2TB storage) would cost about $5400 (it's with 12 gigs of ram on new config, as I don't see a point if you're getting i7 based technology to set your ram up as dual channel as the technology is designed to be enhanced to use triple channel, which to me is really the only reason why apple would sell their base configs as 3 (3x1gig) and 6 gigs (6x1gig); I paid a lot less for mine being slightly used (by about 3 months) and still under warranty.
3) I don't necessarily need bleeding edge technology. an 8 Core Xeon is fast enough for me, and will run my MacOS perfectly fine, and my bootcamp (for the few windows apps I need) just fine. Eventually I know I'll need to upgrade, but not atm.

Eventually, after the new machines have been out for a while, and when I see a real need to upgrade, I'll look on the lightly used market.

grue

Mar 9, 2009, 06:49 AM

While I'm bored and posting here, I should mention that at this moment, it's almost 11pm and I'm at work, waiting for this godforsaken render to finish so I can burn off screeners for corporate partners. Who likes pizza?

Macpropro80

Mar 9, 2009, 06:50 AM

grue

Mar 9, 2009, 06:55 AM

where are you? its 7:50 here in CT.

Melbourne, Australia. I'm sitting here watching Forgetting Sarah Marshall and watching Compressor sllloooowwwwwwllllllllllyyyyyy do its thing, and then I need to burn off eight copies of the screener after I finish. I eagerly await OpenCL + new version of Final Cut Studio that will take advantage of it.

Plutonius

Mar 9, 2009, 06:57 AM

Snow Leopard

I want to see independent benchmarks with Snow Leopard before I decide what I get.

Setmose

Mar 9, 2009, 07:22 AM

But yeah, I'm not saying Apple makes a habit of it, but to say that they never do it is the kind of blanket statement that drives me to rage-induced madness. Everyone between the age of birth and about 17 can evoke the same reaction.

Backpedaling is such a great way to stay in shape! :apple:

grue

Mar 9, 2009, 07:23 AM

Backpedaling is such a great way to stay in shape! :apple:

Who's backpedaling? I never said Apple does a lot of price drops, I simply said it's flat out wrong to say they never do.

Igantius

Mar 9, 2009, 07:34 AM

Who's backpedaling? I never said Apple does a lot of price drops, I simply said it's flat out wrong to say they never do.

And you're quite right too - Apple cut the price of the entry-level Cube by about 300 hundred bucks and then discontinued the model (and the entire line-up) six months later.

grue

Mar 9, 2009, 07:35 AM

And you're quite right too - Apple cut the price of the entry-level Cube by about 300 hundred bucks and then discontinued the model (and the entire line-up) six months later.

Aha, there we go. I knew there was something G4-based that had a price drop, I just couldn't remember what the hell it was.

fabriciom

Mar 9, 2009, 07:48 AM

Discussing price drops with current customers who have paid the current prices will get you no where. If you notice they will make up anything to try to convince them selves it was *OK*. Also they seem to be hard core apple fans. So be wise and don't waste your time.

chedda

Mar 9, 2009, 07:58 AM

I can only draw my conclusions from personal experience. I bought my G5 dual 2.0 as a top of the range product which should have been relatively future proof. The next revision dropped the instantly obselete pci-x (not express) format.I believe it also dropped the agp graphics card format. Who knows what is happening between nvidia and apple, for sure things are in progress and by no means finalised. One thing is for sure is that apple writes the drivers for these cards. Surely something highly suitable for snow leopard is in the pipeline as i cannot believe a 512 card is the optimum for a workstation. This may only then be available as a BTO like the quadro which is otherwise unavailable (unless flashed). I understand Tallest Skill your strong commitment and i salute you for it where would we be without the feedback ? At the moment a lot of questions remain unanswered as to performance especially with SL. We here can only speculate as to the behind the scenes progress with gpu's selection & development. For sure apple likes to tout being the industry leader in products and hardware which the gpu isn't really. The processors yes are great undisputably. Regarding pricing i think apples prices for ram have dropped considerably. I think they are slightly responding to requests and feedback in this respect especially with the quad trying to cover the x mac position.
By the way my power mac was still a great investment and served me loyally for 5 years being productive under tiger. I am by no means complaining and i agree that these discussions are inevitable, sometimes non productive but essential !

Setmose

Mar 9, 2009, 08:11 AM

Who's backpedaling? I never said Apple does a lot of price drops, I simply said it's flat out wrong to say they never do.

Quite precisely you said neither, but launched an ad hominem attack on Tallest Skil:

"You haven't been a Mac user very long, have you?"

That is where the thread was derailed. And, in fact, you've had a long string of attacks about his age, what with your comments about "how many Mac computers did you actually buy after puberty" and "Everyone between the age of birth and about 17 can evoke the same reaction".

Not very useful to anyone scanning these threads for info or ideas about Mac Pro, but serves your own cult of personality I guess. Rage indeed.

Crack a Fosters and calm sown a bit! :apple:

grue

Mar 9, 2009, 08:16 AM

Quite precisely you said neither, but launched an ad hominem attack on Tallest Skil:

"You haven't been a Mac user very long, have you?"

That is where the thread was derailed. And, in fact, you've had a long string of attacks about his age, what with your comments about "how many Mac computers did you actually buy after puberty" and "Everyone between the age of birth and about 17 can evoke the same reaction".

Not very useful to anyone scanning these threads for info or ideas about Mac Pro, but serves your own cult of personality I guess. Rage indeed.

Crack a Fosters and calm sown a bit! :apple:

The comment about people between birth and 17 actually wasn't aimed at him. I was watching the news and some dumbass teenagers beat up some old guy :mad:

But yeah, I'll concede I derailed the thread a bit.

grue

Mar 9, 2009, 08:18 AM

Also, ten points for knowing what an ad hominem attack is in the first place. The educational standards even in the developed world are so sad these days, I weep for the future.

fabriciom

Mar 9, 2009, 08:28 AM

Also, ten points for knowing what an ad hominem attack is in the first place. The educational standards even the developed world are so sad these days, I weep for the future.

They guy seems to be from Israel. I'm sure living in a constant war teaches you all about them. It wouldn't surprise me if they where tough how to defuse bombs in high schools.

Setmose

Mar 9, 2009, 08:33 AM

Also, ten points for knowing what an ad hominem attack is in the first place. The educational standards even the developed world are so sad these days, I weep for the future.

Agreed. I used up all my tears years ago, but not my sense of apprehension. Now I just work hard trying to "make a dent in the universe", to quote Steve Jobs. :apple:

kevink2

Mar 9, 2009, 09:03 AM

I bought my pro only a year ago. If I wanted to be on the annual treadmill I would do like I did in the past and build a windows computer. And just upgrade components as long as the technology permitted.

Also, trying to build up a emergency fund since last election.

myca

Mar 9, 2009, 10:08 AM

It's not uncommon for Apple to drop prices, but I think they normally drop on a new revision of hardware (sometimes at least), and I'm hoping they'll do that with the next rev of the mac pros, or have them all as dual processor configurations.

Couple of Mid cycle price drop links here

http://www.macrumors.com/2008/07/03/1-8ghz-ssd-macbook-air-drops-500/
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/05/01/04/briefly_massive_apple_uk_and_canada_price_cuts_ipod_mini_drives.html

Back on topic.

No new mac Pro for me for the following reasons, note this is regarding the base model which I had budgeted for.

Price/Performance ratio - seems very skewed compared to the last base model (8 core 2.8), especially when the 8 core 2.8 may outperform the new 2.66 quad in some tasks, and for a cheaper (UK) price too.

Ram limitation - Only 4 slots, that's the same as my dual G5 from a good few years ago, plus it seems silly to not have at least 6 slots in their for the triple channel goodness.

GPUs - Nvidia have recently released the GTX 295, and ATI have the 4870X2 and there are rumours of the 5 series on the horizon so although the 4870 is regarded as a very good (if somewhat noisy) GPU it'll be a last gen card pretty soon, they could have at least stuck 1GB in there. Not to mention having to use a (not included) dongle to drive a pair of DVI displays. Of note my G5 included a DVI to VGA adaptor when purchased, which was handy as I had VGA displays back then.

Lack of a workstation GPU - Although I'd have no need for one many heavy users of a select few apps will.

Blu-Ray - Blu Ray doesn't mean much to me, but to some content creators having a mac based Blu-Ray option would be a dream, especially if DVD Studio Pro let you author Blu-Rays, it does seem a little backwards that macs, which are often seen as the creative platform of choice, don't do Blu-Ray, no matter if you think that Blu-Ray is doomed, or the best thing since sliced bread there should be an option.

eSATA - Now the Mac Pros do have features that I may not need, but which others couldn't do with out, likewise many may not need eSATA, but how difficult could it be to implement a couple of ports in the back, so that those who do use eSATA drives don't have to use a PCIe slot, which may otherwise be used for something else.

If I had money to burn, or my landlord didn't mind going without his rent for the next six months I would be tempted to grab one of the higher end 8 core models. But I don't and my landlord would mind, so I'm stuck with the hackintosh option.

cmaier

Mar 9, 2009, 11:36 AM

eSATA - Now the Mac Pros do have features that I may not need, but which others couldn't do with out, likewise many may not need eSATA, but how difficult could it be to implement a couple of ports in the back, so that those who do use eSATA drives don't have to use a PCIe slot, which may otherwise be used for something else.

The chipset has 6 sata channels, of which four are reserved for hard drives and 2 are reserved for optical drives. (We assume this to be the case, though until someone cracks one open...)

Adding esata would then require an additional chip on the motherboard, additional drivers to support, additional cost, etc.

turtlebud

Mar 9, 2009, 04:54 PM

i don't like the new white box (that's my reason for not getting the new mac pro) :)

m1stake

Mar 9, 2009, 05:44 PM

I just noticed Skil's new sig. Laugh out loud, if Apple can't sell one to the guy with the 80 page thread, the joke is on them. :D

Mar 9, 2009, 05:49 PM

...

TheSpaz

Mar 9, 2009, 05:51 PM

Because I have a perfectly good Mac Pro already.

turtlebud

Mar 9, 2009, 06:19 PM

so the white box isn't the real reason why i'm not getting the new mac pro. I think ultimately, it depends what you need the new mac for and for me, i don't need the latest and greatest to do what I'm doing quickly (ie, with the mac not being the limiting factor in how fast I work).

For awhile I found myself seduced by the new geekbench scores that just came out for the 8x2.93Ghz Mac Pro, but I had to remind myself that me getting a Mac Pro is more than just having the fastest machine out there. Even if the 8x2.26Ghz is faster than the 8x2.8Ghz, it doesn't mean I need to bet the 2.26Ghz. Why? Because I'm balancing my budget & my needs. It's funny, I know that when people say "$500 (or $700) over the life of the machine isn't a lot of money" but it IS a lot of money for me when I think about it. And the 8x2.8Ghz is going to be a HUGE upgrade for me from my single dual-core 2.0Ghz G5.

I primarily run Aperture and FCE (aside from your typical web surfing, odd programs, etc.) and it actually runs OK right now - not painfully slow, but I wish it was faster. So in the end, I'm going to continue my pattern of buying the newest old Mac - I bought the dual core G5 when the transition to intel was happening, the previous gen Macbook Pro when the unibody Macbook Pros came out and now, very likely the 8x2.8Ghz Mac Pro. I'm sure there will be times that I want to new sexy Mac, but I've been really happy with the Macs I've owned thus far.

illegalprelude

Mar 9, 2009, 06:35 PM

Not according to my store's return rate. Epic fail on your part regarding the reliability and return rates of todays computers.

Vista SP1 works fine, just as good as XP did after it's second SP. What bottom of the barrel parts ? You need to toss that tired old urban legend away. The Gateways of 5 or 6 years ago were terrible, but the new ones of the last couple of years are good machines. I know what the return rates are. You, on the other hand, are blowing smoke. The Gateway my customer bought had a better CPU, video card and HD than the MacPro. The tower I sold the customer had plenty of expandability for his needs. At $800.

Btw, MacBook Pros and iMacs have some of the highest return rates. Defective video cards and lcds. Only Acers are worse. Epic fail, indeed.

wow man, im not sure what store you work in and or planet, but were gonna just have to agree that we disagree that Gateways and the word quality can come in the same sentence. Considering nobody I know and the people they know and the size of their market share, I would say many will agree with me on that one.

Its to me the story of the kid who rices out his civic and thinks because it has vents on the side and a turbo on the side and hell even same HP, he somehow is now hanging with the Ferrari.

Blu-Ray - Blu Ray doesn't mean much to me, but to some content creators having a mac based Blu-Ray option would be a dream, especially if DVD Studio Pro let you author Blu-Rays, it does seem a little backwards that macs, which are often seen as the creative platform of choice, don't do Blu-Ray, no matter if you think that Blu-Ray is doomed, or the best thing since sliced bread there should be an option.

exactly. Am I the only one who recalls that it was a few years ago at WWDC that Jobs was on stage with the president of Sony and together, they declared the year of HD had begun. We showed of .H264 with House of Flying Daggers and yes Final Cut can do HD and then everything fell flat on its face with Apples push to Cloud....

So fantastic, I can Shoot in HD, Edit in HD but I can dump back in SD....YAY! or if their solution is everything is going to the clouds, yea...I love my MobileMe but it takes me 30min to upload 20MB...how am I about to upload an HD movie anywhere.

Like ive said, I dont need it included in every machine, but on a Pro Machine, I would like the upgrade option.

illegalprelude

Mar 9, 2009, 06:38 PM

wow...wtf another duplicate
[Please Delete?]

davewolfs

Mar 9, 2009, 06:58 PM

I'm not buying until Apple stops charging rediculous premiums. I can build a better quad core system for $1500. So why would I spend $3000?

m1stake

Mar 9, 2009, 07:10 PM

I'm not buying until Apple stops charging rediculous premiums. I can build a better quad core system for $1500. So why would I spend $3000?

Because we're stupid apparently.

mason.kramer

Mar 9, 2009, 07:49 PM

The price.

xraydoc

Mar 9, 2009, 08:56 PM

Two things: one is money and other is my current 2006 dual dual-2.66GHz Mac Pro is still sufficient for my needs.

illegalprelude

Mar 11, 2009, 12:15 AM

Two things: one is money and other is my current 2006 dual dual-2.66GHz Mac Pro is still sufficient for my needs.

2 very legit reasons :D

MadisonTate

Mar 11, 2009, 01:33 AM

Because I just bought a 100-pack of floppies for my Apple ][.

Scottsdale

Mar 11, 2009, 03:09 AM

iPhone is the most recent example, but of course isn't a computer.

My PowerBook 3400c/240 and Power Mac 6500/300 both had price drops right around the time I bought them. I can't recall which was which, but one dropped right before I bought, and the other dropped right after.

8600 had a drop, as did the 9600 at the same time if memory serves.

I believe there was a drop in the Yikes/Sawtooth era as well, but that might be ****** del toro

Price drops... sure, certain components have price drops like SSD. And the iPhone is a very rare exception. I think where INTERNATIONAL buyers USED to see price drops was due to the currency value versus the dollar. The reason the price has jumped so dramatically internationally lately is the worldwide currency values are falling all over versus the US Dollar.

I had a bunch of people tell me oh prices go up all of the time. The thing is here in the US, the price always stays the same. The speed bump update corrects the price so buying after an update gets best value as prices then drop per component price of Apple, and then they put a nicer component in the computer and they do this continuously ALWAYS seemingly keeping the price CONSTANT here (in USA)... although products like the Mac mini have to yield Apple some hefty PERCENTAGE margins, those components used for two years couldn't have cost much at the end of the two years before the update. Heck, even now, they cannot. Apple's pricing model works because of the Mac OS X. Without that, competition would force a different model. Apple really has an excellent model for APPLE SHAREHOLDERS...

grue

Mar 11, 2009, 03:16 AM

Price drops... sure, certain components have price drops like SSD. And the iPhone is a very rare exception. I think where INTERNATIONAL buyers USED to see price drops was due to the currency value versus the dollar. The reason the price has jumped so dramatically internationally lately is the worldwide currency values are falling all over versus the US Dollar.

I had a bunch of people tell me oh prices go up all of the time. The thing is here in the US, the price always stays the same. The speed bump update corrects the price so buying after an update gets best value as prices then drop per component price of Apple, and then they put a nicer component in the computer and they do this continuously ALWAYS seemingly keeping the price CONSTANT here (in USA)... although products like the Mac mini have to yield Apple some hefty PERCENTAGE margins, those components used for two years couldn't have cost much at the end of the two years before the update. Heck, even now, they cannot. Apple's pricing model works because of the Mac OS X. Without that, competition would force a different model. Apple really has an excellent model for APPLE SHAREHOLDERS...

For what it's worth, I was living in the US during the price changes I mentioned.

Scottsdale

Mar 11, 2009, 03:17 AM

Here's what a customer told me about why he didn't get a MacPro. He had just bought a Nikon D300 and Lightroom. He was replacing his old 3.4Ghz P4 XP box with 1GB memory, 64 MB video card and 120GB HD.

I showed him the last gen MacPro single quad for $2,399. He said his daughter had one and was using Aperture.

He asked what a similar PC would cost. I showed him a new Gateway i7, 8GB memory, 750GB HD and 1GB Nvidia 210 video card. Faster CPU, four times as much memory, twice as much HD and a much better standard video card. $800.

Ok, I will bite here. Never seen a nice Gateway in all of my years but then haven't seen one for a few years. The thing is, when I go to Gateway.com, for $799 I don't see anything buy a Core 2 Quad CPU and nothing like the specs you quoted.

AND, I don't see how on earth you can state that the Gateway with an i7 chip competes and even beats a true server Xeon chip? Really? How does this beat the Mac Pro?

Please explain further? I just don't see it even assuming you could run OS X on the Gateway (NOT - I know that), but my point is the reason people buy Mac Pros isn't because they're cheaper than a Gateway or Dell. The reason is they're true professional machines. Sure, it costs a hell of a lot of money, but a professional is using it for his livelihood when he buys an Octacore Dual 2.93 GHz Nehalem CPU Mac Pro. I don't know how possible the Gateway or anything competes.

So, explain it to me like I don't know anything, because I don't see anything you are talking about for $800 when it comes to Gateway. And I don't see a single computer on the market competing with the Octacore Dual Xeon Nehalem 2.93 GHz Mac Pro. No matter how skewed the results could be...

Please do explain... what I am missing.

xparaparafreakx

Mar 11, 2009, 03:19 AM

Time.

Im always out, in class or doing something else. I would love a Mac Pro but the time I sit down and use it is less then I use my Air.

If I dont get girlfriend then maybe but I if I, forget about. I wont even have time to install all my darn applications.

jjahshik32

Mar 11, 2009, 03:23 AM

Man I'm trying to justify the purchase of the mac pro but even with the 20% student ADC discount.. I still find the 2.66ghz model (the one I really want) is still $4000.

Chaos123x

Mar 11, 2009, 03:39 AM

Prices to high for the Octo 2.66ghz, Don't want display port on my GPU. Like having a firwire 400 port on the FRONT of my computer.

I am happy with my 2008 2.8ghz octo. :D

grue

Mar 11, 2009, 03:43 AM

Like having a firwire 400 port on the FRONT of my computer.

On the one hand, you can just get a 400-800 cable, but on the other hand, I see where you're coming from. It's super convenient, and I even have a little stand that I keep next to my tower on the floor for when I hook up cameras or whatever.

Chaos123x

Mar 11, 2009, 03:47 AM

On the one hand, you can just get a 400-800 cable, but on the other hand, I see where you're coming from. It's super convenient, and I even have a little stand that I keep next to my tower on the floor for when I hook up cameras or whatever.

Yeah well it sucks looking for adapters (they get lost easy) and if you leave them plugged in, you run the risk of someone walking by and snapping it off, ruining the port.

Could get all new cables, but thats allot of cables to replace.

MadisonTate

Mar 12, 2009, 01:37 AM

I hope everybody knows about signing up for ADC, which costs $499 in the US.

Base quad-core 2.66GHz w/3GB RAM, 640GB disk - $1999 (compare to $2499)
Move to 2.93GHz for $2399 ($2999)

Base octo-core 2.26 w/6GB RAM, 640GB disk - $2639 (compare to 3299)
Move to 2.66 for $3759 ($4699)
Move to 2.93 for $4719 ($5899)

...and of course you get a copy of Snow Leopard with the ADC.

Looks like you save from :$500 to $1180 by becoming a developer. Even more if you're silly enough to buy memory, drives, monitors and extra graphic adapters from Apple. Actually, you get about 20% off the rest of the stuff. Easy to save as much as $4000 on a loaded Mac Pro.

MadisonTate

Mar 12, 2009, 02:00 AM

For reference,

Dell quad-core Xeon 2.66GHz, 4 GB RAM, 750GB disk = $2436 (T7400)
Move to 3GHz for $2798

Dell octo-core Xeon 2.33GHz, 4 GB RAM, 750 GB disk = $2570
Move to 2.66 for $3175
Move to 3.00 for $3899

NOTE: This is NOT Nehalem, which runs twice as many threads as these processors. The Dell systems all have a 256MB NVS 290 graphics adapter and 16xDVD writer, no monitor.

The quad-cores seem well-priced, even at Apple list (no ADC). But remember that Apple is shipping Nehalem, Dell is still shipping last-generation Xeons that do NOT have hyperthreading, full QPI, DDR3, etc.

The octo-cores come at a premium, but with the ADC, they're still in the ball park. Like I said, TWICE as many threads means the octo-cores can run 16 simultaneous threads. Doesn't really compare...

MadisonTate

Mar 12, 2009, 02:14 AM

HP

quad Xeon 2.66, 4 GB RAM, 80 GB HDD = $3130
For 2.83GHz, $3430

octo Xeon 2.33, 4 GB RAM, 80 GB HDD = $3269
Move to 2.66 for $4129
Move to 2.83 for $4729

But that's still not Nehalem Xeon...

myca

Mar 15, 2009, 07:58 PM

The chipset has 6 sata channels, of which four are reserved for hard drives and 2 are reserved for optical drives. (We assume this to be the case, though until someone cracks one open...)

Adding esata would then require an additional chip on the motherboard, additional drivers to support, additional cost, etc.

I really don't see how adding a small chipset on the motherboard would add that much to the cost, and with the price of the mac pro it should really come as standard for those who need it, and those who don't have any spare PCIe slots. Most of the current new X58 motherboards have the 6 channel sata chipset on there along with an additional chipset that adds another 2 to 4 sata channels.

Trinity

Mar 15, 2009, 08:18 PM

The dimensions. I would happily pay the 2500 euros of a Mac Pro if it was half the size, with similar processors, only a couple of hard drive bays etc. So my new 2,26Ghz Mac Mini is on the way. This one is too small and simple for my needs but I save 1500 euros while I wait that Apple release the MacOS to be installed in any PC.

Umbongo

Mar 15, 2009, 08:57 PM

For reference,

Dell quad-core Xeon 2.66GHz, 4 GB RAM, 750GB disk = $2436 (T7400)
Move to 3GHz for $2798

The quad core Mac Pro is more akin to the T3400 as they both use single socket processors. Based on Dell's current prices a system like the 2.66GHz Mac Pro would work out at around $2000.

jjahshik32

Mar 15, 2009, 09:24 PM

Cliff3

Mar 15, 2009, 09:27 PM

So, whats your reason for not getting a Mac Pro just yet?

Nothing, my 8 core 2.26 machine will be here Wednesday. 12GB of OWC memory and a WD 1TB RE3 drive was ordered separately and should arrive the same day.

jjahshik32

Mar 15, 2009, 09:33 PM

Nothing, my 8 core 2.26 machine will be here Wednesday. 12GB of OWC memory and a WD 1TB RE3 drive was ordered separately and should arrive the same day.

Kool! Tell us how that works out!

I can easily afford the 2.26GHz but the 2.66GHz is what I really want. The QuickPath interconnect seems to be faster in speed compared to the 2.26GHz version. I think it was 5.2 vs. 6.4.

Lucibelle

Mar 15, 2009, 09:46 PM

Nothing, my 8 core 2.26 machine will be here Wednesday. 12GB of OWC memory and a WD 1TB RE3 drive was ordered separately and should arrive the same day.

You're getting yours a day ahead of me. :( I ended up getting the 8G RAM upgrade from Apple, then ordering an additional 8G RAM from OWC (actually saves about $50 doing it that way). I've seen the reports of the new MP doing better with 6 sticks or RAM instead of all 8, but I'll be using it for music, so I'll probably end up using the full 16G of RAM.

...until 4G RAM prices drop, anyway.

Agurri

Mar 15, 2009, 09:51 PM

I don't need a MacPro... sure, it would be nice... but my 3 years old Macbook is doing the job. I've bought myself a Nikon D90 instead of another computer... I think it's a good compromise :)

Lucibelle

Mar 15, 2009, 10:00 PM

I don't need a MacPro... sure, it would be nice... but my 3 years old Macbook is doing the job.

Agreed. Next year, and for the next several years, I'll be drooling over future models. However, I've used a Mac since '96, and this will be my third one. I make 'em last, and why shouldn't I? They're great machines.

MCHR

Mar 15, 2009, 10:03 PM

What's stopping me from a new Mac Pro?

Well, I'm deliberating. Now I'm just trying to determine how much future software I may run on it, and what processor setup I'll be looking to have. As an educated guess, I'd be favoring the nehalems, but the price scale is a little steep, as the 2.26 seems to be a lateral move from the 2008 2.8. If (and I really hate saying "if") the 2.66 was priced just a touch over the 2.26, I'd have one ordered one by now.

As it is, I'm just spinning and trying to work out my finances to justify that midrange 8 core. But I DO need an Intel chip Mac for upcoming work. . .

Cliff3

Mar 15, 2009, 10:08 PM

Kool! Tell us how that works out!

I can easily afford the 2.26GHz but the 2.66GHz is what I really want. The QuickPath interconnect seems to be faster in speed compared to the 2.26GHz version. I think it was 5.2 vs. 6.4.

The low end CPU has enough power for my needs, and the 2.66 commands a substantial price premium that I can't justify paying.

FWIW, this chart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Nehalem_(microarchitecture)) says all the Gainestown CPUs have 6.4 GT/s transfer speeds, while this chart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeon#5500-series_.22Gainestown.22) says the E5520 is 5.86 GT/s versus 6.4 for the X5550. I have found several other articles that suggest all the Gainestown CPU's share the higher of the two speeds. Since Intel hasn't published official specs yet, it's probably anybody's guess.

I am not a system designer, so I am not going to attach importance to specific low level chip metrics without a solid understanding how the whole of the system interacts and exactly what effect that metric has on the performance of the system. It's easy to point at a number and say bigger must be better, but things usually aren't that simple. Then there's that number with a dollar sign in front of it. That one I understand pretty well.

Cliff3

Mar 15, 2009, 10:55 PM

You're getting yours a day ahead of me. :( I ended up getting the 8G RAM upgrade from Apple, then ordering an additional 8G RAM from OWC (actually saves about $50 doing it that way). I've seen the reports of the new MP doing better with 6 sticks or RAM instead of all 8, but I'll be using it for music, so I'll probably end up using the full 16G of RAM.

...until 4G RAM prices drop, anyway.

I ordered mine from Macconnection.com - they discount it slightly ($110) and don't charge sales tax to this California resident. This will be the 3rd Mac I've bought from them. They're a good vendor.

I opted for 12GB based on the benchmark results that have been posted so far. My primary memory consumer will be VMWare virtual machines - I have a Windows Server 2003 VM that is running SQL Server, IIS, and the Cognos 8.x server components that needs some room to stretch its legs. I expect Lightroom and Photoshop will be a lot happier on the new machine than they are on my 3GB MBP too.

leekohler

Mar 15, 2009, 11:01 PM

Too expensive. My G5 is great for now.

jjahshik32

Mar 15, 2009, 11:22 PM

The low end CPU has enough power for my needs, and the 2.66 commands a substantial price premium that I can't justify paying.

FWIW, this chart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Nehalem_(microarchitecture)) says all the Gainestown CPUs have 6.4 GT/s transfer speeds, while this chart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeon#5500-series_.22Gainestown.22) says the E5520 is 5.86 GT/s versus 6.4 for the X5550. I have found several other articles that suggest all the Gainestown CPU's share the higher of the two speeds. Since Intel hasn't published official specs yet, it's probably anybody's guess.

I am not a system designer, so I am not going to attach importance to specific low level chip metrics without a solid understanding how the whole of the system interacts and exactly what effect that metric has on the performance of the system. It's easy to point at a number and say bigger must be better, but things usually aren't that simple. Then there's that number with a dollar sign in front of it. That one I understand pretty well.

Its just me though saying this but I find the 2.26GHz some what crippled. Just viewing the performance gains from the 2.8GHz 8 core previous gen feels like the $500 isnt really worth it. Especially when you can stick the same ATI 4870 in the 2.8ghz model.

But the 2.66GHz and the 2.93GHz seems to be pretty substantial upgrades. I know its more expensive than the previous gen models that they replaced but then it is much faster.

We wouldnt know everything yet for certain which programs have differences in speeds compared to the last gen to this generation since the full benchmarks hasnt risen yet.

Anyway to your last comment, usually in the computer world unfortunately bigger numbers do mean better but if dollar signs infront of it is that much important to you, your best bet would be a 2.8GHz 8 core previous gen mac pro as to the nehalem 2.26GHz Octad.

I used to own the 2.8GHz 8 core model and sold it off sometime mid last year. I waited about a year now and I do have the funds, but I feel gypped. I really really thought that the base model of the new nehalem would be about 2x faster than the model it was replacing in this case the 2.8ghz model. But nope, I waited for nothing and I know others feel the same as I do and now considering paying a crazy amount of $1200 more to get the mid range model just to justify the wait of the purchase.

Maybe this was Apple's true scheme of things but man last year I wouldnt even touch the 3.0GHz or 3.2GHz models since they were in the $4k range but now I'm considering a $4.5k midrange model and I'm sure other people who has waited are not thinking twice about pulling the trigger on the 2.66GHz model.

jmpage2

Mar 15, 2009, 11:27 PM

Cliff3

Mar 15, 2009, 11:37 PM

Anyway to your last comment, usually in the computer world unfortunately bigger numbers do mean better but if dollar sign infront of it is that much important to you, your best would be a 2.8GHz 8 core previous mac pro as to the nehalem 2.26GHz Octad.

Not necessarily. For example, if faster memory transfer performance just means the CPU is stuffing a buffer because the memory can't consume the data as quickly as the CPU delivers it, then that QPI performance number becomes somewhat moot. Standardized benchmarks are more useful measures of performance.

And thanks for your financial advice. I'll ignore it. Enjoy your mac mini.

jjahshik32

Mar 15, 2009, 11:38 PM

Price is definitely what is keeping me out of a Mac Pro. I can afford it but the only reason that I would need something as powerful as the Mac Pro at this point in time is the occasional Windows game, The Pro is the only machine that offers fast enough video performance that I wouldn't have to have two machines sitting at my desk.

I'm contemplating just getting a Mini to start getting comfortable with OS X, and sucking it up for 12 months to see if Apple will pull their heads out and offer a more mid-range workstation product between the Pro and the iMac.

You know what? I noticed many people going to this route and I have done so already. Buying a mini and using it for the next 6-12 months until either Apple bumps up their specs (probably when 3.2GHz nehalem is out in the next couple of months) to replace the 2.93GHz and bump each model down and keep the prices the same.

If the 2.66GHz model bumps down to $3299 I would gladly buy that new base model. Also dont forget Apple has gotten their nehalem xeon systems quicker than other vendors (which could really explain the increase in price).

jjahshik32

Mar 15, 2009, 11:46 PM

Not necessarily. For example, if faster memory transfer performance just means the CPU is stuffing a buffer because the memory can't consume the data as quickly as the CPU delivers it, then that QPI performance number becomes somewhat moot. Standardized benchmarks are more useful measures of performance.

And thanks for your financial advice. I'll ignore it. Enjoy your mac mini.

Well think about it this way, there are no more fsb which the QPI is really design to replace. Faster fsb = faster performance, faster qpi= faster performance.

What your describing seems to be the nehalem vs. previous gen architecture. When memory speed is literally 2x faster and when the new architecture gotten rid of the fsb for the much faster qpi, I dont see why the cpu should buffer nearly as much in this case.

I really really really REALLY want one of these new nehalem but the value is so terrible. I found a 2.8GHz 8 core model at one of my local apple store for $1899 brand new which I'm seriously considering. Basically the same performance for $1400 less. But I feel like I waited for nothing to only just get old technology.

Another fear is that in 2-3 more months the nehalem mac pros will get a free speed bump and I'd feel more gyped. For example the 15" unibody mbp got a free bump up to the 2.66GHz and the 2.93GHz for the same price.

I Love Apple at the same time I hate them.

Lucibelle

Mar 16, 2009, 12:28 AM

While I don't doubt that the MacPro will get a speed bump sometime during the year, I have my doubts that they will drop the 2.66 octo $1400 to the current price of the 2.26. But hey, maybe they do... Bottom line is that there will always, ALWAYS be the next model to be released and to drool over. By next release, the 3.2 octos (yes, I call them "octos", now hush) will seem archaic, but will still be plenty of power to meet the needs of many users.

I waited for the Nehalems to be released. I've always used Macs, and I'm just going to trust that Apple knows what they're doing when it comes to the decision to release 2.26 as the lowest octo model. They have yet to disappoint me.

Oh, and Cliff...if I weren't married. :D

greax

Mar 16, 2009, 02:00 PM

Tallest Skil

Mar 16, 2009, 02:03 PM

Most people would see that something is very wrong here:

Yep. What's wrong is that your country suffers from not being this country.

In that Apple has to pay taxes, shipping, and other international business fees, which push the cost of the product higher outside their country of origin.

I would LOVE to have some Club Orange and Club Lemon over here, but it is not fiscally viable for me to order it from the Republic of Ireland.

Apple seems to think this is the way to do business. Well not with me.

Heaven forbid you need to buy anything from a company outside your own country, then.

Im going to assemble my own linux/windows 8-core Nehalem, with freedom to choose whatever hardware I like and saving thousands of dollars.

You get right on that. Let us know when you can build a Gainestown machine for less than the price of a Mac Pro.

Cliff3

Mar 16, 2009, 02:03 PM

I had decided to finally buy my first mac, but now I have changed my mind again...

Most people would see that something is very wrong here:

Base Mac Pro on apple.dk: DKK 23,999.00 / 5.71 = $ 4,203.00

Base Mac Pro on apple.com: $3,299.00

Apple seems to think this is the way to do business. Well not with me. I think they are pushing the price enough already. Not that I cant afford it, been saving since last summer. There just isnt enough value for the money.

Im going to assemble my own linux/windows 8-core Nehalem, with freedom to choose whatever hardware I like and saving thousands of dollars.

/T

It's probably due to Danish customs and VAT, not Apple. Until the economy imploded I was going to be moving to Australia for at least a couple of years to manage a software development team there. Their customs duties and taxes added a substantial premium to imported goods.

greax

Mar 16, 2009, 02:45 PM

Yep. What's wrong is that your country suffers from not being this country.

In that Apple has to pay taxes, shipping, and other international business fees, which push the cost of the product higher outside their country of origin.

I would LOVE to have some Club Orange and Club Lemon over here, but it is not fiscally viable for me to order it from the Republic of Ireland.

Heaven forbid you need to buy anything from a company outside your own country, then.

You get right on that. Let us know when you can build a Gainestown machine for less than the price of a Mac Pro.

True true, its sad to live in DK with 25% VAT, and since the extra cost on apple.dk is 27.3%, this means that apple is adding an extra $75.25.

I am saying that Apple should do some country specific profit maximization, instead of just adding 25% and shipping. I am sure they would benefit too, as they are missing out on many customers in the North European countries.

/T

Gonk42

Mar 16, 2009, 02:57 PM

You get right on that. Let us know when you can build a Gainestown machine for less than the price of a Mac Pro.

I'm thinking of doing this too (running Linux not OS-X) but until things are officially released it's impossible to get accurate costs. With the 08 Mac Pros the cost of self-build was a lot more than the Mac Pro but for the 09 model I don't think it will still be the case. I think a base model (2.26GHz Octo) with more RAM slots than the Mac Pro will cost under £2k here in the UK whilst even with a generous student discount the Mac Pro is something like £2,600. But at this point this is all speculation.

Ploki

Mar 16, 2009, 02:58 PM

True true, its sad to live in DK with 25% VAT, and since the extra cost on apple.dk is 27.3%, this means that apple is adding an extra $75.25.

I am saying that Apple should do some country specific profit maximization, instead of just adding 25% and shipping. I am sure they would benefit too, as they are missing out on many customers in the North European countries.

/T

our country doesnt even have Apple Care :)
but i still have a mac heh.
there are ways in europe, to get around VAT... ;) and when you do that, you are more close to the US price.
you probably know, US citizens have to pay taxes at the end of the year.

im not going to convince you but i dont think they are ripping of Eu costumers, everything americans costs way more in US.

if not anything, get it from UK then! pound/euro is still sweet. i know a few guys that did just that. :) and get around VAT, and you are down to less than the US price. :D

diotav

Mar 16, 2009, 03:04 PM

http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/5499/usdollarsjpg.jpg

.. ;)

Sdancott

Mar 16, 2009, 03:14 PM

http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/5499/usdollarsjpg.jpg

.. ;)

Huh?

jjahshik32

Mar 16, 2009, 03:24 PM

http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/5499/usdollarsjpg.jpg

.. ;)

Damn those are olld school money. I havnt seen those, 20's, 50's, and 100's in the past 6 years!

Abidubi

Mar 16, 2009, 03:52 PM

.. ;)

Now here is what I'm talking about!
http://bkmarcus.com/blog/images/money/MonopolyMoney.jpg

Oops... This is what I meant.
http://media.nowpublic.net/images//30/c/30ce4c67a0572a09808be5b4962d69a0.jpg

I get them confused all the time, especially with:
http://www.afrugalgal.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/canadiantire.jpg

jjahshik32

Mar 16, 2009, 04:03 PM

Now here is what I'm talking about!
http://bkmarcus.com/blog/images/money/MonopolyMoney.jpg

Oops... This is what I meant.
http://media.nowpublic.net/images//30/c/30ce4c67a0572a09808be5b4962d69a0.jpg

I get them confused all the time, especially with:
http://www.afrugalgal.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/canadiantire.jpg

Whoa~!! Thats some serious cash!! :eek::eek::eek:

BTW, looking at your sig.. wow your mac pro is estimated to ship in may?!?

Abidubi

Mar 16, 2009, 04:17 PM

your mac pro is estimated to ship in may?!?

Oops, lol. Typo.

MIDI_EVIL

Mar 16, 2009, 04:42 PM

8GB memory limitation on Quad.

Gutted.

stix666

Mar 16, 2009, 04:51 PM

The mini-display port connector isn't long enough. Where I want the Mac Pro is a bit more than 42in away from the screen. And I really want a 24in LED ACD (IPS, LED, built-in isight, clean solution for future laptops, films should look good on it, 17% off regular price)

jmpage2

Mar 16, 2009, 07:01 PM

You know what? I noticed many people going to this route and I have done so already. Buying a mini and using it for the next 6-12 months until either Apple bumps up their specs (probably when 3.2GHz nehalem is out in the next couple of months) to replace the 2.93GHz and bump each model down and keep the prices the same.

If the 2.66GHz model bumps down to $3299 I would gladly buy that new base model. Also dont forget Apple has gotten their nehalem xeon systems quicker than other vendors (which could really explain the increase in price).

I have now done so also. Mini + 4GB of RAM to get my feet wet before splurging on something as spendy as a Mac Pro.

jjahshik32

Mar 16, 2009, 07:05 PM

I have now done so also. Mini + 4GB of RAM to get my feet wet before splurging on something as spendy as a Mac Pro.

I have to mention one thing that the mac mini is a very capable "main" machine. These little machines are awesome. :D

jmpage2

Mar 16, 2009, 08:25 PM

I have to mention one thing that the mac mini is a very capable "main" machine. These little machines are awesome. :D

I am hoping I am as impressed as you are!

In all likelihood if I like the Mini I will get an even more powerful Mac at the end of the year.

myca

Mar 16, 2009, 08:33 PM

I am hoping I am as impressed as you are!

In all likelihood if I like the Mini I will get an even more powerful Mac at the end of the year.

My macbook, which has similar (but not quite as good now) specs to the mini and it runs like a charm, just make sure you feed it with 4gig of RAM otherwise you may be a little disappointed, and a faster HD if you can.

fernmeister

Mar 17, 2009, 03:02 AM

More than happy with my early 2008 Mac Pro. Until the software I use (Audio) goes through 2-3 more upgrade cycles, there'll be no compelling reason to look at an upgrade.

voyagerd

Mar 17, 2009, 03:07 AM

I have to mention one thing that the mac mini is a very capable "main" machine. These little machines are awesome. :D

that's a good idea, but I need somewhere to put the 4 hard drives from my G5...

ncc1701d

Mar 17, 2009, 04:22 AM

Yep. What's wrong is that your country suffers from not being this country.

In that Apple has to pay taxes, shipping, and other international business fees, which push the cost of the product higher outside their country of origin.

I would LOVE to have some Club Orange and Club Lemon over here, but it is not fiscally viable for me to order it from the Republic of Ireland.

Heaven forbid you need to buy anything from a company outside your own country, then.

You get right on that. Let us know when you can build a Gainestown machine for less than the price of a Mac Pro.I'm not sure. I cross check the Hong Kong web site with the Aus one all the time. Currently, the Mac Pro is cheaper (with business discount) in Hong kong than in Aus - yet the iphone Touch or time capsule (for eg) (with same discount), is not. Some things are cheaper here, and some things are cheaper there. Weird.

Toronto Mike

Mar 17, 2009, 08:16 AM

I have to mention one thing that the mac mini is a very capable "main" machine. These little machines are awesome. :D

Would the Mini handle Photoshop CS4 well - given the way you've put in the faster HD and maxed the ram? Could you go as much as using a 30" lcd and still use Photoshop well?

Mike

michaelsviews

Mar 17, 2009, 09:40 AM

I'm looking for a portable, my MP runs fine, has ACare, 10 gig of Ram, and more than enough HD space & the 2 Dell 2209WA displays. Dual boot into Winblows so I can play a game or so with my son. And am currently shopping for CS4 Web Premium at a decent price.

I do miss my MBP but it looks like my son has grown accustomed too it and he's buying it from me

DeepCobalt

Mar 17, 2009, 12:40 PM

I am in the market for a new Mac Pro system, and have the money to spend. But, I'd like to buy a whole system from Apple.

I am disappointed that Apple didn't go with Octad 2.4, 2.8, and 3.2s instead of the 2.26, 2.66, 2.93 line-up (but maybe that had to do with chip availability). I would have preferred a 2.8 to a 2.66. But I can live with that. The real problem is NO NEW MONITORS!!! I really don't want to get another 2-year old 30" cinema display--and I want to have applecare cover my display!

So I'm waiting for the display release. Then I'll go with the 2.66 begrudgingly...

jjahshik32

Mar 17, 2009, 12:55 PM

that's a good idea, but I need somewhere to put the 4 hard drives from my G5...

FW800 via external HDD is awesome with the mini!

Robofunc

Mar 17, 2009, 02:53 PM

I'm in the market for a MP, but I'm not sure getting the latest one is really worth it.

I'm a graphic designer and I do freelance work from my home. I'm currently using a dual 1Ghz G4 MDD machine running 10.3, and CS2. It's really solid and I can do pretty much everything I need to with no fuss.

My main issue is that I need to be running a newer OS and I'll be getting CS4 soon, so my old system likely won't cut it anymore. I've kind of been out of the Apple hardware loop since the switch to Intel, so I'm not sure what the best bang for my buck is.

As you can tell, I tend to keep a machine around for a long time before upgrading. That way, they pay for themselves, especially if you're doing what I do.

IDK, maybe I'll just max out the RAM, install 10.4 and hold on to my dollars for now...

Abidubi

Mar 17, 2009, 03:35 PM

I'm currently using a dual 1Ghz G4 MDD machine running 10.3, and CS2. It's really solid and I can do pretty much everything I need to with no fuss.

I can't imagine any reason why you wouldn't update to any MacPro model with a machine at least 1/12 as fast as current systems. Seriously.

Cinebench 2002 dual 1.0 VS 2009 octo 2.93 ($5899 over 7 years = $842 per year or 1 pick-up's tank of gas per month):

Single: 672 - 4074 (6X faster)
Multi: 1170 - 25644 (22X faster)

VS 2009 quad 2.66 ($2499 over 7 years = $357 per year or 1 McD's trio per week):

Single: 3572 (5.3X faster)
Multi: 14753 (12.6X faster)

Even a 2008 iMac is 6 times as fast for about $1500 now. Unless the graphics you design are 256 color 32X32 icons...

jmpage2

Mar 17, 2009, 03:50 PM

$842 per year or 1 pick-up's tank of gas per month

You have a pickup that gets 2mpg?

The average person drives about 15000 miles per year. The average truck gets 15mpg.

1000 gallons of gas per year.

~80 gallons of gas per month.

Gas doesn't cost $10 or more per gallon last that I checked.

Robofunc

Mar 17, 2009, 03:54 PM

I can't imagine any reason why you wouldn't update to any MacPro model with a machine at least 1/12 as fast as current systems. Seriously.

Cinebench 2002 dual 1.0 VS 2009 octo 2.93 ($5899 over 7 years = $842 per year or 1 pick-up's tank of gas per month):

Single: 672 - 4074 (6X faster)
Multi: 1170 - 25644 (22X faster)

VS 2009 quad 2.66 ($2499 over 7 years = $357 per year or 1 McD's trio per week):

Single: 3572 (5.3X faster)
Multi: 14753 (12.6X faster)

Even a 2008 iMac is 6 times as fast for about $1500 now. Unless the graphics you design are 256 color 32X32 icons...

I do 99% print work, so it's all big, 300dpi Photoshop files, lots of vector stuff in AI and InDesign, etc.

I know the newer machines are faster, but I use one at my ad agency day job and the only thing that really feels slower on my home machine is working with super complex vector illustrations. Outside that, the majority of the stuff is about the same. My g4 feels about the same when it comes to launching apps, turning fonts on and off, etc.

Benchmarks are one thing, and that's all fine and good, but real work is what counts for me. I never use my computer for games or anything, so if I'm just as productive with my older machine, the only reason to upgrade hardware is so I can run the newer software, no?

Of course, it's well past time to upgrade my OS and get CS4, so what I really need to know is if the brand new MP is any better than the previous generation. Kind of seems like it's not that great a bang for the buck. I'm thinking I'll probably get an '08 MP and be happy for another 7 years.

Abidubi

Mar 17, 2009, 04:08 PM

You have a pickup that gets 2mpg?

The average person drives about 15000 miles per year. The average truck gets 15mpg.

1000 gallons of gas per year.

~80 gallons of gas per month.

Gas doesn't cost $10 or more per gallon last that I checked.

1000 / 842 = .842 cents per gallon. I don't know US gas prices, but up here in snow land it's about 85 cents a liter. I'm guessing it's 1.50 or something for you guys.

Like I said... $842 per year, or paying for 1 truck's tank of gas every month($70.66). FYI in 7 years (84 months) that's $5894, or the price of an octo 2.93. Where is the confusion? Did you think I was talking about ordering $357 worth of McD's per week?

Abidubi

Mar 17, 2009, 04:15 PM

what I really need to know is if the brand new MP is any better than the previous generation. Kind of seems like it's not that great a bang for the buck. I'm thinking I'll probably get an '08 MP and be happy for another 7 years.

Of course the new machines are faster. If they weren't, why would they have been developed in the first place? As is usually the case with newer technology, the close you get to the limit the less of a "bang for the buck" you get. Probably the best bang for the buck you will ever get is buying 1 or 2 year old technology. Any older and it's no better than buying a $3M mansion on top of a volcano that's going to erupt in 5 minutes for 1 dollar. Sure you got the mansion cheap, but what was the point?

peskaa

Mar 17, 2009, 04:16 PM

I have an '08 Mac Pro which works perfectly fine, with power to spare. The new '09 machines are nice, but not nice enough - I won't upgrade for another one or two cycles.

I will be pulling a new 4870 and 120 to go in my 2008 machine, as I do want increased graphical power.

Plus, I want Blu Ray.

sigmadog

Mar 17, 2009, 04:25 PM

I do 99% print work, so it's all big, 300dpi Photoshop files, lots of vector stuff in AI and InDesign, etc....

...I'm thinking I'll probably get an '08 MP and be happy for another 7 years.

You and I are in very similar situations. I have my graphic design biz (work from home - just me, the missus, and the dog) where most of my work is in CS4, and of that, I'd say 80% is in Illustrator and heavily layered Photoshop files. My G5 Dual has some difficulty working with really large vector files, and I get fairly noticeable slowdowns which is a bit frustrating. I do a little bit of 3D work also, for which I want as many cores as I can get, and more and more I've been getting into illustrating in Painter X, which also chokes on large files.

Like you, I'm planning on keeping my Mac Pro for a long time. I'm shooting for eight years, but I'll be very pleased if it makes it six.

I can understand going for the 2008 Pros instead of the 2009's. The 2.8 seems equivalent in many respects (judging from early benchmarks) to the 2.26, and it's cheaper. That's a very attractive combination.

I will probably go the other way, and get the new 2.26. Not for any real rational reason, other than a general inclination towards newer technology on the rare occasions when I buy.

But I'm not going to make the purchase until I hear some real-world reviews of the new systems. I have a fundamental distrust of small sample sizes, which make up all these early benchmarks (plus, the numbers mean little to me other than in a general "thumbnail rough on a napkin" sort of way).

JimGoshorn

Mar 17, 2009, 05:04 PM

I've been getting into illustrating in Painter X, which also chokes on large files.

From what I have read, Painter doesn't take advantage of any more memory than 4gb since it is a 32 bit application. Corel knows that users want 64 bit and multi-processor support but who knows when that will come to pass.

sigmadog

Mar 17, 2009, 05:50 PM

From what I have read, Painter doesn't take advantage of any more memory than 4gb since it is a 32 bit application. Corel knows that users want 64 bit and multi-processor support but who knows when that will come to pass.

Thanks for the info. I didn't know that.

I think a lot of us are waiting/hoping that our software catches up to our computers in the next couple years.

Robofunc

Mar 17, 2009, 06:00 PM

Of course the new machines are faster. If they weren't, why would they have been developed in the first place? As is usually the case with newer technology, the close you get to the limit the less of a "bang for the buck" you get. Probably the best bang for the buck you will ever get is buying 1 or 2 year old technology. Any older and it's no better than buying a $3M mansion on top of a volcano that's going to erupt in 5 minutes for 1 dollar. Sure you got the mansion cheap, but what was the point?

I said "better," not "faster" :) For me, the price is just as much an issue (if not more) than speed. The difference in price vs. the difference in performance between the 08 and 09 MP doesn't seem to add up. I think the 08 is right for me.

You're right about going too old, though. I'm not going to go buy a PPC g5 or anything crazy like that. Might as well do nothing.

BluRay=meh. I'll continue watching TV on my cathode fossil and movies on my DVD/VCR(!). I've seen BluRay and it's nice, but it's like having diamond trim on your car's interior. Really no point, IMO. I'm not trying to build a movie theater in my house or compete with salivating gadget junkies for cool points.

Sigmadog, I kind of think there's no getting around huge vector files being relatively slow, but hopefully an 08 MP will be better than my g4. It has to be. I do most of my illustrating on paper, scan, then refine in Illustrator. Those are usually simple shapes with just a few colors (logos, stuff for screen-print and letterpress, etc). It's stuff like converting images with halftone dots to 1-color line art, auto-traced photos and the like that bog me down. I haven't used a Corel product since 1998. I don't know how they are now, but back then it was pure torture. Of course, I was on a PC.

jjahshik32

Mar 17, 2009, 06:09 PM

I said "better," not "faster" :) For me, the price is just as much an issue (if not more) than speed. The difference in price vs. the difference in performance between the 08 and 09 MP doesn't seem to add up. I think the 08 is right for me.

You're right about going too old, though. I'm not going to go buy a PPC g5 or anything crazy like that. Might as well do nothing.

BluRay=meh. I'll continue watching TV on my cathode fossil and movies on my DVD/VCR(!). I've seen BluRay and it's nice, but it's like having diamond trim on your car's interior. Really no point, IMO. I'm not trying to build a movie theater in my house or compete with salivating gadget junkies for cool points.

Sigmadog, I kind of think there's no getting around huge vector files being relatively slow, but hopefully an 08 MP will be better than my g4. It has to be. I do most of my illustrating on paper, scan, then refine in Illustrator. Those are usually simple shapes with just a few colors (logos, stuff for screen-print and letterpress, etc). It's stuff like converting images with halftone dots to 1-color line art, auto-traced photos and the like that bog me down. I haven't used a Corel product since 1998. I don't know how they are now, but back then it was pure torture. Of course, I was on a PC.

About the bluray thing, I have to disagree. Have you ever seen a sony bravia xbr series connected to a 1080p bluray movie!?! Its jaw droppingly gorgeous!

I'm thinking about buying a Mac Pro and move the mac mini over to my bravia xbr6 to watch bluray mkv 1080p movies.

Robofunc

Mar 17, 2009, 06:32 PM

About the bluray thing, I have to disagree. Have you ever seen a sony bravia xbr series connected to a 1080p bluray movie!?! Its jaw droppingly gorgeous!

I'm thinking about buying a Mac Pro and move the mac mini over to my bravia xbr6 to watch bluray mkv 1080p movies.

Yeah, it's very pretty, but it's not like I can't see/hear what's going on when I watch a DVD. It's a nice luxury. It's not cruicial to the story. Besides, if I really want to watch a BluRay movie, I'll just go to my friend's house.

I'll still be able to work just as well on my computer without a BluRay drive. It's not going to make me any money, win me any work or even give me any inspiration I couldn't get from a less-expensive format.

ncc1701d

Mar 18, 2009, 10:34 AM

What's keeping me is my ego. While I would love to get the new 2.66 8 Core, I just don't think I need it. I think I'm going to go for a fully kitted '09 Quad. Then, in 4 years I won't feel so bad when I want to upgrade, rather than forcing myself to make the 8 Core last longer just because I paid more money for it (but not used it to it's full potential). I think, for me, replacing a well used lower model rig every 4 years will be better than replacing a poorly utilised high end rig every 6.

Oh, and 30" ACD refresh.